that's a strong motor, congrats :)

edit: low blow wayne, low blow:D ;)

oh boy, wayne!

edit: but dane got a little more torque (could it be the .2 liters?) and he barely modified the motor compared to this 3.2 .... er ....

yeah, but the 3.4 cranked out a lot more torque.

Those are great numbers out of the 3.2. However, the stock # of 198 hp puts the flywheel at 233 hp using your 15% drivetrain loss factor.

Now doesn't the stock motor put out something like 217? How do you explain the 16 hp difference? Or did you just have something special to begin with?

Tristan

Ok, first of all, it may not be OK to compare the dynos, for reasons hashed out over and over in other threads.

However, since we already are :p, I'll say this ... If you take the proportional increase in displacement from 3.2 to 3.4, this engine would scale from 195 tq to 207 tq. This means the 3.4 CIS has 6 lb-ft on what a theoretical scaled verson of this would have. not too much. Imagine what this motor would do with a 20/21 cam!

Lets not forget that factory engine figures are minimums.
-Chris

Tristan, The previous # was with a B&B exhaust(198rwhp). Trust me that this engine is stock. This is on my Club Racing car and the scrutineers can pull a "full cavity search" on your motor if they suspect anything.

James

James,

OK - completely understand. Those are great numbers - congrats. This is why my 74 Euro spec car probably won't be that competitive in E-Class.

Best of luck with this season.

Tristan

Also keep in mind that no dyno operator or manufacturer has anything to gain by having their software put out conservative-skewing numbers. Some inflation is inevitable. Like a scale, though, they're useful for measuring the impact of a given mod, relative to a baseline run from the same motor, on the same machine (preferably on the same day).

The bottom line is that the Porsche 3.2 is no slouch, especially with an improved exhaust and chip.

When I looked at this thread a second time, all I saw was Amir saying "Low blow, Wayne," and I knew right off the bat Dempsey was up to some *****! :D

Hilarious, Wayne! I nearly coughed up my lunch, laughing!

James: A big ol' fat hairy congrats, man. That's good stuff. And you didn't have to cut into the motor to get it. Sure, torque wins races, but stock torque means you've saved enough money to still take your car to the track.

And you didn't spend $13K doing it, either. SmileWavy

Hmmm...maybe a 3.2 is the better deal...:)

I only have one single question, :confused: where this 15% loss comes from? I have contacted Dyno Jet and other Dyno manufactors in search of this documented data, so if you guys have it please share with me as everyone seems to have a different %.

He must have added one of the propellers in the tailpipe.

Juan, no one believes 15% is accurate, especially over a wide range of cars and transmissions. But if it's used as an accepted figure, it at least stops the skewing of everyone's rear-wheel numbers in different directions.

Wheel horsepower figures are the most useful number, of course, but that leaves open the question of what the cars in stock configuration would have typically put out.

come on...confess. How many eRams do you have in there?

Loren, is that you? ;-)

is the exhaust available to the public? is there a website someplace?

(Sound of wind blowing across the empty desert, a tumbleweed drifts by...)

Voiceover: "Loren? Loren?"

Another low blow from David. Man I thought you liked your CIS :D

I wonder what it would take to make my engine into a DME controlled 3.2 then add chip, air cleaner and exhaust? Less than a 3.4 conversion? Or would anyone be willing to swap a 3.2 for my 3.0? Neither is likely to happen....and building a 3.4 CIS engine from a 3.2 CIS is likely to be a better option for the same power...but there are other complications..like class rules, for one.

Man is it getting hot in here theres days...must be the summer heat :D

I'm sure he's busy constructing an intelligent and appropriate response. ;-)

I love my CIS.

I like this, too:

http://www.clewett.com/products/carrerasm.jpg

It's a 3.2 induction bolted to a 3.0. Clewett Engineering sells them. They're not cheap...